Give up the stupid glossary

Date: Apr 12, 2004

Give up the stupid glossary

Date: Apr 12, 2004

I have enjoyed the glossary tremendously but the multiple posts on it are difficult. Perhaps just two posts? One open for suggestions and commentary and one closed and sticky for daily updates by Webster only. I might suggest the same thing for Babbs' list of departures.

Having said that, Webster, the glossary was more fun when the definitions were short and sweet. Also, there have been some very clever suggestions for inclusion that you have apparantly ignored. Finally, some of the satire escapes casual readers, especially when you make serious statements and sarcastic ones (often using the same descriptive words) in the same glossary description. I sound critical - sorry - I am truly a fan!

Date: Apr 12, 2004

Yes the glossary was funny for the 1st 15 minutes. Since then it's just overdone silliness. Have we nothing better to do?

I totally disagree about the glossery ~ it inserts a wonderful, needed (and educational) bit of fun into such a stressful situation for so many of us. As to spending time doing other things ~ just read the different threads. Lots of people are doing investigative & other work on the situation at hand. Different people among us have different talents, different ways of expressing themselves, different interests in choosing what to do or go after. We all add important parts to the whole.

Webster ~ I want you to know that I really enjoy and value your contributions and eagerly look forward to your latest additions.

Date: Apr 12, 2004

webster responds.....

To Can't Live Like this-----

First off let me say that webster and Fire Shelby are not the same person. I (Webster) have been doing the glossary on my own, and Fire Shelby's posting of it likely takes very little of his own time. Fire Shelby has done quite a bit of the investigative reporting that you long for --- and it is quite good. In fact, it's having a significant effect in certain areas of this whole mess. So, don't blame Fire Shelby for misallocating his time (at least as you see it). Second, you don't have to look at the glossary strings if you so choose (that's beauty of it, it's just a string, not the whole board).

To malapropism---

I appreciate your suggestions. Sometimes it's hard to keep the entries short and sweet. Sometimes there are stories to be told --- e.g., the Ricki Garrett entry --- so longer descriptions become necessary. I will work on being as brief as possible. On another point, perhaps I will end up covering some of the suggestions at a later date (keep looking). Finally, reality and satire are all mixed together; hopefully most can see the difference (it's sorta like the Thames admin., the surreal and real are all jumbled up).

Thanks for commenting.

Date: Apr 12, 2004

Can't live like this, I wanted to respond to your comment about the list of departing faculty. As I read the list, no commentary is offered as to "why" these people are leaving, it's just a list (unless I missed something). Your criticism that not all are leaving because of Thames misses a critical point, I think. Sure, not all are leaving because of Thames, I think anyone would admit that. But this is true: all are leaving during the Thames administration's reign. Here's the point in that: When history professor Doug Chambers notes in his speeches that you could hire 3 or 4 history professors with Jack Hanbury's salary (risk manager), he makes a good, but hidden point. Shelby hired Jack Hanbury on faculty lines that were once held by faculty, not these goofy administrators with spiced up titles. The point is, as these people leave, many have their positions turned into admin slots by Thames. The point, then, is not why they leave but simply that they are leaving. B/c of this phenomenon, I know of some department chairs who are all but begging their senior people not to retire until Thames appears down for the count. These chairs fear what will happen to their faculty slots.

Secondarily, as has been reported on this board, the hiring process is seriously damaged by the crises. The average quality of the assist profs we're losing is greater than that we're bringing in as replacements.

Fire Shelby · Status: Offline

Opinions are like, uh, noses. Everyone has one.

I'm not the creator of the glossary, but I certainly feel that it is a great and worthwhile addition to this website.

You are entitled not to like it. You are also the master of your own mouse. You don't like it? Don't click on it.

And no one here is prohibiting you from doing whatever investigative work you want to do. Report it here, report it to the IHL, report it wherever you feel it will have the greatest effect.

Best wishes to you.

Date: Apr 12, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Can't Live Like This
"What would happen if that information, naming names, were to come out in public? "

Just wanted to respond to this one point (as for my opinion on the glossary, I love it and have emailed links to it to several of my friends):

This is the biggest problem in trying to "blow the cover" off the financial problems at USM. No one will talk. If you know of *anyone* on the inside that will talk, please send my email address to them (truth@FireThames.com), and I will hook them up with a reporter. They have to be willing to go on record (as far I know, no one will take anonymous information, at least not at the H'burg Am).

Believe me, it is my fondest wish to get Shelby on a financial technicality (sorta like Al Capone finally getting it for tax evasion!). But it's not going to happen until someone is brave enough to be the "whistleblower."

Date: Apr 12, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: truth4usm
"But it's not going to happen until someone is brave enough to be the "whistleblower." "

I don't think the operative characteristic is "brave." I think the most important thing would be "independently wealthy," because any whistleblower will find the Thames machine working both inside the university & in the Hattiesburg community to ensure that person won't find a job without relocating out-of-state.